The Supernatural Part II

[JayUtah]

Didn't Hawking know...

I was privileged to be selected to work with and alongside Prof. Hawking on a project. I consider it one of the pinnacle high points of my career.

You have no idea what he's talking about, or what you're talking about.

I join my colleagues in urging you to educate yourself more thoroughly in science before you attempt to teach us practicing scientists what you think it says about your religion, or vice versa. Or at least to say something relevant to the post you quote.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Periodic reminder that "Supernatural" is just a fancy word for "Special Pleading" and if you invoke to explain something you're intellectually failing by definition.

"I'm not right in the real world, but I'm right in some magical special world I'm invoking with no evidence" is just "I'm wrong and stupid" with more words.

If anyone is offended by that, the rules of the MA in the "SuperUserAgreement" that I magically know about but can't prove says it isn't.

 

[DetectedMotion]

Hello
The book of the Qur'an was not said by an ordinary person or a scientist or by all the people of the 7th century. Even all the people of this century have not said. Because none of them know the hidden sciences in the Qur'an. And they don't understand. I have told you clear examples of modern science in the Qur'an. It is up to you to believe it. But in no way can you deny these facts of the Quran. Your efforts are completely useless. "The Qur'an was spoken only by the one and only God. And it is unique."Thank you

Who is the author of the Injeel?
Do you have a copy of the original Quran?
And why does the Quran describe the trinity of the Bible?

 

[DetectedMotion]

Hi

In all existing translations of the Quran, this word has been translated as "from" in the discussion of the creation of man. It means that God created man from dirt, mud, foul-smelling mud, etc. While the meaning of the word "I" in this discussion of the creation of man means "in" dirt, mud, foul-smelling mud. And this issue has been scientifically proven in biology and abiogenesis. And in fact, science is completely compatible with the Qur'anic content.

So after the creation of Adam, what compelled your pagan God to say;

“And He taught Adam the names – all of them. Then He showed them to the angels and said, ‘Inform Me of the names of these, if you are truthful.’ They said, ‘Exalted are You; we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, it is You who is the Knowing, the Wise.’ He said, ‘O Adam, inform them of their names.’ And when he had informed them of their names, He said, ‘Did I not tell you that I know the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth? And I know what you reveal and what you have concealed.’” [2:31-33]

Why would Allah (who supposedly knows the unseen and knows what is revealed and concealed) need to say to the angels "IF you are truthful"?

 

[Mojo]

Hello
Our discussion is scientific. The scientific content that was said by God in the heavenly and unique book of the Qur'an. If you think about anything other than this, you are completely wrong.

Your discussion is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of science. You claim that the Quran reveals scientific “truth”, but there is no such thing. Scientific knowledge is provisional. It is subject to change as new evidence and new hypotheses emerge, and are tested. “Modern science” is just a snapshot of what we know now. Why would the Quran reveal the knowledge that is current in 2022, and not, say, 200 years earlier or later?

All you are doing is twisting the Quran in an attempt to retrofit it to your misunderstandings of “modern science”.

If the Quran was the perfect revelation of knowledge that you claim it is, it would reveal not the current state of scientific knowledge, but the way the universe actually is. It would tell you how “modern science” is wrong. You would be able to point to testable examples of the Quran demonstrating that modern science is wrong. You are completely unable to do this.

 

[steenkh]

What great scientific discoveries is revealed in the Qur’an that has not yet been discovered by science?
It is easy to retrofit science into obscure interpreted quotes from a “holy” scripture, but it will be much more impressive if you can point out where science should look for new insights.

 

[JayUtah]

Scientific knowledge is provisional. It is subject to change as new evidence and new hypotheses emerge, and are tested. “Modern science” is just a snapshot of what we know now.
* * *
If the Quran was the perfect revelation of knowledge that you claim it is, it would reveal not the current state of scientific knowledge, but the way the universe actually is. It would tell you how “modern science” is wrong.

This, right here, is the slam-dunk argument.

When we say the evangelists (not just Muslims) get science wrong, it's less about the theories of Hawking or Planck, or other murk that bedevils theoretical physics. It's about misunderstanding what science fundamentally is on about. Religious fanatics seem to see everything -- including science -- through a lens shaped by a belief in the supremacy of received wisdom. They wrongly propose that science is simply another body of belief instead of a body of methods for testing propositions.

Here, the evangelists want us to think their religion and our "religion" are comparable. They compare revisionist snippets of their doctrine to what they think is our "doctrine." Then they think they've proven that skeptics really should believe the religion if they were as devoted to fact as they claim, but are instead blinded from doing so by some ideological animus against religion in general. The intended lesson is, "Skeptics think they're rational, but I'm going to show you how they're not. Religion is really the way to go."

 

[Chanakya]

Your discussion is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of science. You claim that the Quran reveals scientific “truth”, but there is no such thing. Scientific knowledge is provisional. It is subject to change as new evidence and new hypotheses emerge, and are tested. “Modern science” is just a snapshot of what we know now. Why would the Quran reveal the knowledge that is current in 2022, and not, say, 200 years earlier or later?

All you are doing is twisting the Quran in an attempt to retrofit it to your misunderstandings of “modern science”.

If the Quran was the perfect revelation of knowledge that you claim it is, it would reveal not the current state of scientific knowledge, but the way the universe actually is. It would tell you how “modern science” is wrong. You would be able to point to testable examples of the Quran demonstrating that modern science is wrong. You are completely unable to do this.

This, right here, is the slam-dunk argument.

When we say the evangelists (not just Muslims) get science wrong, it's less about the theories of Hawking or Planck, or other murk that bedevils theoretical physics. It's about misunderstanding what science fundamentally is on about. Religious fanatics seem to see everything -- including science -- through a lens shaped by a belief in the supremacy of received wisdom. They wrongly propose that science is simply another body of belief instead of a body of methods for testing propositions.

Here, the evangelists want us to think their religion and our "religion" are comparable. They compare revisionist snippets of their doctrine to what they think is our "doctrine." Then they think they've proven that skeptics really should believe the religion if they were as devoted to fact as they claim, but are instead blinded from doing so by some ideological animus against religion in general. The intended lesson is, "Skeptics think they're rational, but I'm going to show you how they're not. Religion is really the way to go."

Haha, true, that's a great argument!

Everything heydarian's been on about here points to his being clueless about what science even is, but this argument, should even someone as brainwashed as he read through clearly, then there's no we he can persist with his nonsensical POV, at least not sincerely.

heydarian, if you're reading this: The things that you say the Quran says, or hints, about evolution? The things you claim it says, or hints, about cosmology? What we know of these things today isn't the last word in those subjects. If ten years from know there are fundamental changes to some parts there, then what you claim your Quran says (or hints) about these things will no longer hold true. Even if you can't see how ludicrous is your retrofitting in the first place, but perhaps you can appreciate this line of reasoning?

 

[Pixel42]

heydarian, if you're reading this: The things that you say the Quran says, or hints, about evolution? The things you claim it says, or hints, about cosmology? What we know of these things today isn't the last word in those subjects. If ten years from know there are fundamental changes to some parts there, then what you claim your Quran says (or hints) about these things will no longer hold true. Even if you can't see how ludicrous is your retrofitting in the first place, but perhaps you can appreciate this line of reasoning?

It's a point which has been made to him before, he just completely ignores it.

 

[malbui]

I’ve made this same point several times on this thread already.

I live about 3km from CERN and have buddies there who’d love a hint or two about what else they should be looking for.

 

[Mashuna]

I’ve made this same point several times on this thread already.

I live about 3km from CERN and have buddies there who’d love a hint or two about what else they should be looking for.

The Quran will be able to tell them, via twisted metaphor, once they've already found it. Sort of.

 

[heydarian saeed]

It's a point which has been made to him before, he just completely ignores it.

Hello
You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content. In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated. Your problem and even the interpreters of the Qur'an! It means that you don't read the Qur'an up to date and you don't translate and interpret it. I do not expect anything from you. But with the help of God, I am telling the truth about the Qur'anic content. I have no obligation to accept it either. You have authority. like everyone

 

[steenkh]

Hello
You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content.

The scientists from 1400 years ago had no clue about any of this, and neither had the Qur’an, as demonstrated by your resort to spurious translations, and by the many counter examples that you studiously ignore.

In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated.

As clear as mud. Your examples are not clear at all, and there are other quotes that contradict your “clear” examples. But you don’t like to talk about that.

 

[JayUtah]

You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content.

Please give an example of such a book.

In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated.

Except they aren't. You have to strain the interpretation so that "day" means some indeterminate period of time that happens to coincide with present knowledge of the age of the universe. You have to pretend that "spread out" somehow refers to an egg so that you can grope your way from a flat-Earth, geocentric model evident in the Qur'an to something that resembles modern celestial mechanics. And somehow these "clearly stated" truths weren't evident to people reading the Qur'an throughout the centuries. They only seem to manifest themselves when reading backward from modern knowledge to ancient scripture.

How is it, for example, that the "clearly stated" relationships among Earth, Moon, Sun, and stars in the Qur'an did not lead early believers of the Qur'an to write and speak accurately about the solar systems, galaxies, and multiverses we now know in science? Why did science have to theorize them first before some Muslims could claim it was all in the Qur'an all along?

Your problem and even the interpreters of the Qur'an! It means that you don't read the Qur'an up to date and you don't translate and interpret it.

No, you can't keep insisting that your critics have a poor understanding of your scripture. They're pointing out your errors. Simply insisting through it all that you must somehow still have superior knowledge is, at this point, merely insulting.

Telling us we have to keep updating our interpretation of the Qur'an is exactly the evidence that undermines your point. You're telling us we have to start with modern scientific understanding and then ponder some new meaning in scripture that allegedly foretold it. But that's exactly the opposite of proving that the Qur'an somehow foretold it all. You're just doing what every believer in the supernatural has done: backfill your supernatural sources with information you already know. It's postdiction, not prediction.

Finally, you really need to grasp that you are not a scientist. And when I say that, I don't just mean that you aren't a trained, qualified practitioner of science like many of us are. I mean that you misunderstand science at its most fundamental level. When you say you have to read the Qur'an with modern understanding, you need to grasp that science isn't finished understanding. What we knew 200 years ago scientifically bears little resemblance to what we know now scientifically. And science is predicated on the principle that what we'll know 200 years from now won't likely resemble too much of what we know now. Your whole attempt to claim your religion has predicted science is based on the misconception that science has arrived.

I do not expect anything from you. But with the help of God, I am telling the truth about the Qur'anic content. I have no obligation to accept it either. You have authority. like everyone

Well then we wonder what you hope to accomplish here. You can't speak the language of the forum. You aren't interested in discussing your claims. You don't understand science. And you are unwilling to be challenged on your interpretation of the Qur'an. It seems you have some other sort of agenda that remains hidden.

 

[Mojo]

Hello
You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content.

The ancient Greek texts that medieval Arabic writers preserved have at least as much “accurate scientific content” as the Quran. Usually a lot more.

In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated.

Porky pie.

Your problem and even the interpreters of the Qur'an! It means that you don't read the Qur'an up to date and you don't translate and interpret it.

Your problem is that everyone here can see that you are just twisting the Quran to fit your own misconceptions of “modern science”.

But with the help of God, I am telling the truth about the Qur'anic content.

Given the results, it would appear that your imaginary friend is incompetent.

 

[IanS]

Hello
You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content. In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated. Your problem and even the interpreters of the Qur'an! It means that you don't read the Qur'an up to date and you don't translate and interpret it. I do not expect anything from you. But with the help of God, I am telling the truth about the Qur'anic content. I have no obligation to accept it either. You have authority. like everyone

It's not just us here (or any atheists) who do not accept your claim of science in the Quran. It's all of the worlds scientists who do not accept it! And they are ones who have made the most astonishingly detailed and accurate investigations of all those things that you claim are in the Quran ...

... you are here claiming that all of that science is miraculously revealed in the Quran, but the very people who discovered and studied all of that science in literately millions of tests and experiments, all completely reject any notion that those discoveries were ever revealed in a 7th century Quran.

And that is the end of the story.

 

[Pixel42]

Hello
You just need an old text or book from 14 centuries ago. Bring him to have said such accurate scientific content. In the Qur'an, such scientific matters are clearly stated. Your problem and even the interpreters of the Qur'an! It means that you don't read the Qur'an up to date and you don't translate and interpret it. I do not expect anything from you. But with the help of God, I am telling the truth about the Qur'anic content. I have no obligation to accept it either. You have authority. like everyone

You have once again completely ignored the point that is being made.

You are being asked to use the Qu'ran to predict a future scientific discovery. If the Qu'ran really contains references to scientific knowledge not known at the time it was written but which has been discovered recently, it must surely also contain references to scientific knowledge yet to be discovered. So point to those predictions, as you claim to be pointing to the ones that predict recent discoveries. It should be easy, and we can then see if they are indeed confirmed as scientific knowledge continues to advance.

This is the only way you can provide genuine evidence that what you claim is true. Until and unless you can do this, you are wasting your time.

 

[Mojo]

The fact that Saeed can only fit the Quran to things that he already knows (or at least that he thinks he knows) makes it obvious that he can find no actual revelations of science in the Quran.

 

[Mojo]

Come on, Saeed, use your knowledge of the Quran to explain how quantum mechanics and relativity can be unified, or what should replace them.

 

[heydarian saeed]

The assertion that the Qur'an contains scientific content said by God is an unsupported religious belief. No discussion in which one participant is arguing a position based on unsupported religious beliefs can possibly be scientific.

This is the scientific thought process for evaluating the Quran:

1. Be educated (or educate yourself) about the history of religions and religious books, and acquire critical thinking skills.

2. Read the Quran in the light of that knowledge and understanding

3. Conclude that it is exactly what you'd expect a barely literate zealot of that time to write. You would certainly never conclude that it contained any science whatsoever, let alone hints about scientific discoveries that would not be made for centuries. Because it doesn't.

This is your thought process:

1. Be brainwashed from birth into believing all sorts of religious nonsense

2. Decide you want to believe that the Quran contains hints about scientific discoveries that would not be made for centuries

3. Read the Quran, looking for anything you can somehow interpret as supporting that belief, no matter how preposterous are the mental gymnastics you need to perform to do so

I repeat: there is no point in returning to this thread if all you're going to do is repeat the same mistakes and faulty arguments that have been explained and rejected a dozen times already.

Hi
We fully accept your remarks in this message. It is logical. Basically, my Quranic studies have been based on this. No bigoted and illiterate person in the past 14 centuries or even in the present time can tell the contents of the Quran. This content is unique and said by God alone.
Your advice makes sense. But it is clear from your words that; You have no study about the history of religions and the history of Arabia in the seventh century. Besides, you are not familiar with the words and texts of the holy books and the Qur'an. We advise you to act according to the logic you say first.
Thank you